By Maung De’ Doe

WELL, here we go again. With the first general election since 2020 set to commence on 28 December, the international media machine is churning into overdrive. Just look at a recent Reuters report titled Myanmar junta’s shift from battlefield to ballots faces long odds. 

It’s not like we’re hearing this kind of headline for the first time; we’ve heard its variations hundreds of times before. The narrative is always the same: the election will fail, it is merely a sham, and the government is on the verge of collapse. 

However, for those of us actually living on the ground in Myanmar – not sitting in Bangkok coffee shops, Washington DC offices, or Australian university lecture halls – these assessments are meaningless. They are not independent insights but rather the echoes of “gurus” trapped in an echo chamber of one-sided information.

Many of these commentators haven’t set foot in Myanmar since the conflict began; some may never have been here at all. Yet, their words are cited as gospel. In reality, they are completely divorced from the complex realities of Myanmar. They claim to offer analysis, but they are merely forcing events to fit into their desired narrative. They are telling their donors what they want to hear, relying on “fake news” that perpetuates the problem rather than finding a solution. 

The “Keyboard Experts” 

The first and most glaring issue is distance. The “analysts and diplomats,” cited in reports like those from Reuters, likely haven’t breathed the air in Yangon or Nay Pyi Taw for years. Reading their comments, it is painfully obvious these are people viewing Myanmar through a laptop screen. They live comfortably in Western capitals, safe under the protection of the very nations imposing sanctions on Myanmar. 
From such a vantage point, it is easy to criticize the government’s roadmap. When you aren’t the one facing the actual conflict or economic hardships, it is easy to dismiss the election as a “sham”. 
These so-called experts claim the election is “impossible” because they are measuring Myanmar against Western standards rather than political realities. They fail to see that for ordinary citizens, this election – however imperfect – is an exit strategy from the state of emergency and a path back into a legal framework. To accept this requires a pragmatic view from the ground, something these “keyboard experts” sorely lack. 

Echoes of “Fake News” 

If these experts aren’t in Myanmar, where do they get their news? The answer is simple: they regurgitate one-sided information from exile media, activists, and opposition groups. While these groups have their own political existence, treating their words as objective “real news” is a fundamental error. 
Western analysis seems to thrive on narratives of state collapse. A minor skirmish is portrayed as a major military defeat; a small protest is amplified into a nationwide revolution. The word “impossible” is born from these cherry-picked snippets of information. They conveniently ignore the fact that the military has maintained control over major cities and the administrative machinery for nearly five years. They have been predicting a collapse for a long time, yet here we are – still standing. 
These observers merely repeat the talking points of the NUG and their affiliates because they cannot verify the situation on the ground themselves. They listen to stories crafted to secure continued foreign funding. They completely omit the desires of the silent majority: the people who are weary of war crave stability, and are ready to go vote. 

Donor-Driven Analysis 

To put it bluntly, one must ask: “Who benefits?” The industry of Myanmar “experts” runs on funding from Western governments and foundations. These entities have political agendas. If an analyst were to write, “The Council’s election might succeed” or “The military is the only institution holding the country together”, their grants would almost certainly be cut. 

Prophecies of “imminent collapse” sell. They validate the sanctions imposed by Europe and the West. If an expert argued that “holding elections in phases is better for security”, they would be branded a “junta apologist”.

Therefore, the analysis is tailored to the audience. It is written to please donors. They tell their Foreign Ministries exactly what they want to hear: “Your pressure is working, the military is weak, the democrats are about to win”. This is not genuine analysis; it is paid propaganda masquerading as expertise.

The Reality on the Ground 

Contrary to the Reuters headline, the situation regarding the December 2025 election is quite solid. Starting the election in 102 townships is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign of pragmatism. It is about doing what is possible within the security context to move the political process forward. 

Furthermore, the narrative that Myanmar is “internationally isolated” is a myth. While the West shouts, Myanmar’s neighbours are engaging. China, Russia, and India – countries that actually matter to Myanmar’s affairs – support the election. They understand that a transition to a civilian government led by the military is a standard, stabilizing mechanism in this region. If you assume success depends on Western recognition, you are just replaying that same old “impossible” broken record.

Voter lists are out. The Myanmar Electronic Voting Machines (MEVM) are ready (a fact critics ignore). Political parties are campaigning. For millions of people in secure areas like Yangon, Mandalay, and Ayeyawady, the ballot box is a far better exit strategy than the barrel of a gun.

Conclusion 

The “experts” cited in the Reuters report will likely continue predicting collapse right up until the new government is formed and parliament (Hluttaw) convenes. They will cry “sham”, cite fake news, and cash their checks from donors. 

But history is written by those who actually show up. The real evaluators are the Myanmar people who will line up to vote on 28 December. They aren’t voting to please a researcher in London. They are voting for their future, their stability, and their own definition of democracy. 

It is time to stop listening to voices from the ivory tower and look at the hard realities on the ground. To those who think the machinery of the state will grind to a halt because of foreign criticism, I say: Your “impossible” is simply incorrect. Despite your criticism and scepticism, the election and its subsequent phases will happen. 
Care to place a bet?